Friday, 15 February 2013

Horsemeat Sweepsteak....

Ok, so that phrase is a little unfortunate, but its Friday after all!

This horsemeat scandal is about to get a lot worse according to various reports for at lunchtime today over 1000 product tests will be revealed and who is to know where horsemeat has entered the food chain.

Let's be clear, I would be delighted to find out for example that kebabs, a rare, drunken 'treat for me were to contain horsemeat - I mean they look like they are made of anything and frequently taste the same, so really to have high quality racing nags in them would be good news.

Surely to, this must be a boost for the pot noodle industry, those famous vegetarian beef and tomato flavour soup-things look wholesome by comparison with many types of fresh meat products now.

So what do we think, who is going to come last and what will be the most shocking revelation? I am going for some frozen mince to be found to be 100% horsemeat at a less than classy supermarket. I think too at least one Waitrose product will be caught out, causing anguish in the home counties.

I suppose you could say that a dead steeplechaser taken away in a horsebox from Becher's Brook has been 'mechanically recovered', so it seems fitting that its tendons, glands and pizzle should also be mechanically recovered in order to fill a bun at Wimpy.

My bet is that Nigella will turn out to have been passing off tabby cat and urban fox as premium mince to her yummy mummy friends on BBC2.

There are four main issues:1. Getting horse when you thought it was beef;2. Getting contaminants/chemicals in our food because the system has been by-passed;3. The EU's paper based control of our food which has cut down practical testing;4. No accountability because the system is EU based.

Get out of the EU and we get back UK government control of food standards and we can then hold them to account.

Salami, followed shortly afterwards by the Waitroses of this world actually openly marketing horse/donkey salami, which will become popular amongst curious-minded customers.

I've got no problem with it, apart from concerns that the horses and donkeys are being badly treated. Bring them within animal welfare laws. And despite some saying this isn't a scandal, it is one because it's a case of mislabelling, which shits on those believing themselves to be buying beef, who have a right to trust what it says on the label.

Those wishing to become vegetarians or to try vegetarian food. Go to a restaurant specialising in foods from those regions of India where most people are vegetarian. Pick up some of the Indian sweets while you're at it, if you can find them. Very buttry and sugary but just gorgeous to taste and worth getting fat for.

I'm no europhile, but I think this 'paper based EU system' thing is a bit of a bogie.

Yes, the EU General Food Regulations require that food businesses keep traceability records. But this is no different than HMRC demanding businesses keep financial records.

There is nothing in EU law to prevent member states carrying out market surveillance activities. On the contrary, EU law demands it. In fact, that is how the horse burgers came to light in the first place.

2) Standards are generally high for processed food from supermarkets, they usually come back spot on, so it is seen as a waste of time and money.

3) It's become trendy is recent years to focus on 'halal' products and see if you can find one with pork in, which is not uncommon but never a 'scandal'.

4) Food enforcement is traditionally split between environmental health (hygiene and microbiological contamination) and trading standards (composition, standards and labelling). EH generally don't give a shit about standards and labelling, only 'public health' and EH tend to wear the trousers. A typical city council will have 6 EH food officers doinmg hygiene inspections for every TS food officer doing composition, standards and labelling. In London and Scotland, EH do all the food and just ignore the standards and labelling side.

Lasagne of value make,In the packet boil and bake;Eye of horse, and toe of frog,Fur of cat, and tongue of dog,Asda’s fork, and Morrison’s sting,Lidl's beg, and Tesco's wringFor a charm of horse drawn trouble,Like a capitalist, boom and bubble

Consumer protection is an EU thing, has been since the Treaty of Rome and just abou every consumer protection law has been EU derived since Maastrict. EC Regulation 178/2002 - aka the General Food Regs - replaces a raft of EC food and feed law.

The theory is that as 2 of the 4 pillars of the EU are free movement of goods and services, all regulation applying to goods and services must be harmonised. This process has been ongoing since the 1960's.

I'm surprise that a clever chap like you is buying into this 'EU paper based system' rubbish. Consider:

a) What's wrong with having a statutory obligation for food businesses to be able to show where the food they sell came from? They have to show the taxman where their money came from so they'll have to keep these records anyway.

b) Rather than have statutory obligations on food businesses to sell food as per description, what is the alternative?

c) Are you suggesting all food businesses should have to submit a representative sample of every meat product, from every batch, for independent analysis? What would happen to small businesses?

d) If you are, then should they be allowed to sell it before the results come back? What would happen to non-frozen meat products?

There is no 'EU paper based system' there are statutory obligations to:

1) Register food businesses with the relevant authorities

2) Attach your number to meat products you put in the food chain

3) Maintain records for inspection showing how to food came into your posession and what you did with it

4) Label it as per the statutory requirements prior to sale.

5) Sell food that is not hazardous to health and meets it's description.

Steven_L, thank you for agreeing that food safety is an EU competence. That was my main point. It is because food safety is EU based that we cannot hold anyone to account when things do go wrong (as they always will).

A paper based system of quality control is fine provided everyone in the chain is diligent, honest and understands what they are doing, and provided the system itself is well designed. And provided sufficient practical checks are still carried out. The more complex the paper system the less likely that any of the foregoing will pertain.

We as a society have become besotted by paper, and whilst we won't accept someone's word we are quite prepared to accept the same sentiment on paper. It is absurd. In my small corner of the world, people who can do the job are in despair because the paper system has become more important than the job itself.

It is because food safety is EU based that we cannot hold anyone to account when things do go wrong

This is rubbish. Businesses that sell horse labelled as beef can be held to account in the UK courts.

The 1990 Food Safety Act is still law and selling horse as beef is a criminal offence under sections 14 and 15. It looks like the Police are also investigating who made the false representations further up the supply chain under the 2006 Fraud Act.

There is a cabinet minister responsible for food (DEFRA ministers) and as food enforcement is delegated by Parliament to Local Authorities then they, and Pickles' department also hold responsibilities.

Trading offences are strict liability, so even if a supermarket got duped themselves, if they had insufficent precautions in place (in a courts opinion) they can still commit an offence.

The really interesting one is that because of the non-EU 2008 Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Act (supported by labour and the tories), no LA can prosecute Tesco without permission from Hertfordshire County Council and Tesco pay HCC under that 'Primary Authority Agreement'.

Steven_L, since food safety is an EU competence then clearly whatever laws the EU makes (Regulations) or cause the UK local government to make (Directives) are actionable in the courts. This is what being in the EU involves, and this is (EU) law, not accountability.

Precisely because those laws are made in Brussels in the normal EU opaque way we, in the UK, do not know who is responsible for their existence. Thus there is no accountability - we (the UK population) cannot point to the person ultimately responsible - no politician can be sacked - we cannot vote out the government that did it. This is such a basic well known fault in the EU that I am surprised I have to explain it.

nice to read that "" This horsemeat scandal is about to get a lot worse according to various reports for at lunchtime today over 1000 product tests will be revealed and who is to know where horsemeat has entered the food chain.

Let's be clear, I would be delighted to find out for example that kebabs, a rare, drunken 'treat for me were to contain horsemeat - I mean they look like they are made of anything and frequently taste the same, so really to have high quality racing nags in them would be good news.""